During a regional preparatory meeting for the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, held from 29 March to 2 April 1993 in Bangkok, Kingdom of Thailand, representatives from 34 countries of East and South-East Asia formulated, drafted and signed the ‘Declaration of Asian Values’, commonly known as the ‘Bangkok Declaration’.

This document was not merely a summary of certain traditional socio-moral values of the peoples of East and South-East Asia, but also a diplomatic proclamation of the politico-economic worldviews of the new emerging regional and global powers, such as the People's Republic of China, Singapore, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

Their unique worldview was constructed as a blend of traditional Asian philosophical, ethical, religious and political concepts, such as Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism and Hinduism, which were united by their geo-cultural characteristics (having emerged and been cultivated on the Asian continent), as well as their skepticism and disagreement with ‘European values’ or ‘American values’ (also known today as ‘Euro-Atlantic values’).

Historically, this moment is significant, as it marks the first ‘ideological conflict’ of the post–Cold War period (1947–1991) between the Western powers (such as United States, Great Britain, France and Germany) and rapidly developing countries from regions known as ‘Third World’ or ‘Global South’, which would take an official stance in the highly debated speech delivered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, at Munich Security Conference in 2007.

Back in 1990’, just one year later after the signing of this historic declaration, in a small landlocked country of Central-Eastern Europe, widely known as the Republic of Belarus (Рэспубліка Беларусь or as medieval chroniclers used to call it, Ruthenia Alba), during the first presidential elections after the declaration of independence from the Soviet Union on 25 August 1991, a politician named Alyaksandr Ryhoravich Lukashenka (Аляксандр Рыгоравіч Лукашэнка), would achieve a landslide victory and become the country's first democratically elected President.

Known for his political character à la soviétique, President Lukashenka presented a unique program for the path the country would follow in its further development, which, in a curious way, resonated with many aspects of the provisions of the ‘Bangkok Declaration’, even though Belarus had very little (if anything) culturally in common with the countries of East or South-East Asia, apart from its history as part of the Soviet Union and the Bloc of ‘people's democracies’– which also included many East Asian countries such as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the People's Republic of Kampuchea (Cambodia), the Lao People's Democratic Republic, etc.

Precisely these shared commonalities between the policies of the Belarusian government and the ‘Asian values’ of the 1993 declaration, will also be the main theme of our article, through the analysis of which we will endeavor to explain why the political nature of Belarus is so unique, not only in the Central-Eastern European region, but also in the European part of the post-Soviet space, as well as how the Belarusian government (or leadership) political understanding is constructed?

Cultural Relativism versus Universal Human Rights

The text of the ‘Bangkok Declaration’ emphasized that, although human rights are indeed universal, they must be examined carefully, in the context of a dynamic and evolving process of defining international norms, as well as taking into account national and regional characteristics, as well as the various historical, socio-cultural and religious backgrounds of each country in particular.

This approach is commonly known in academic, scholastic and intellectual circles as ‘cultural relativism’, and is often used to distinguish different worldviews regarding issues related to social, religious and cultural problems of contemporary societies.

In the context of Belarus, this can be observed in the way Minsk uses this concept as a tool to politically defend itself from criticism of Western countries or organizations – such as the United States, the European Union or the Council of Europe – by labelling individual liberal rights as ‘foreign concepts’, with ‘roots in Western societies’ and incompatible with ‘traditional spiritual values’ of Belarus, whose historic state-forming and nation-building processes were largely shaped by the periods during which its territory was under the rule of the great Eastern European powers of the time, such as the Kyivan Rus', the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union. 

The state traditions, political culture and folk costumes of this aforementioned politeia (Πολιτεία) - an ancient Greek term used to describe all political entities, such as tribal confederation, city-state, kingdom or empire - were very different from those of political actors and peoples in Western Europe, which also explains why modern Belarusian state and national identity today is largely different from its regional neighbors – such as Poland, Lithuania or Latvia – which today are fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic structures (NATO and European Union), as well as from that of Russia or Ukraine, governments and societies of which today are still struggling to find their place in the post-Soviet global order.

Absolute National Sovereignty and Non-Interference Principle

One of the most important clauses of the ‘Bangkok Declaration’ emphatically emphasizes the importance of safeguarding national sovereignty, adheres to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country.

The countries supporting this stance (such as the People's Republic of China, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic etc.), used this concept as a way to shield themselves against any possible diplomatic, economic or military pressure by Western nations, drawing particularly on their historical experience of being colonized and enslaved by European colonial empires (such as British Empire, Portuguese Empire or Dutch Empire).

This position can also be seen in the Belarusian government foreign policy, which strictly abides by principles similar to those of ‘Asian values’, such as geo-political and geo-economic neutrality, as well as non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries.

At the same time, Minsk consistently regards international punitive sanctions, election monitoring by foreign observers and external political, financial or media engagement on support of political entities, non-governmental organizations and civic movements as violations of national sovereignty, and as unlawful attempts by official and nonofficial political actors to directly or indirectly influence socio-political landscape in different countries.

Prioritizing Social Stability and Public Security over Liberal Cohesion

'The primary aim is to have a well-organized society so that everyone can enjoy their freedoms to the fullest. This freedom can only exist in an organized state, not in a natural state of conflict and anarchy.'

These words by Singapore's Prime Minister, Harry Lee Kuan Yew (1923-2015), clearly demonstrate the core philosophy behind Singapore's economic success, which also became one of the ‘Asian values’ widely accepted by Asian governments in the ‘Bangkok Declaration’.

The essence of it is simple: individual political rights (such as freedom of expression or assembly) are consequently subject to restrictions, or even penalties, if they threaten public order and security.

The Belarusian government appears to follow faithfully the teachings of the ‘father of modern Singapore’ and building its relationship with the Belarusian people on the basis of a clear ‘social contract’, in which any kind of political dissent (such as public demonstrations, independent journalism, non-governmental organizations and civil society activism) is severely criminalized in order to preserve what the authorities define as social harmony and public security in the country.

To achieve this, Minsk relies heavily on broad and harsh ‘anti-extremism’ legislation, as well as state security apparatus, commonly known as State Security Committee of the Republic of Belarus (Камітэт дзяржаўнай бяспекі Рэспублікі Беларусь, КДБ РБ).

Simultaneously, to justify this harsh punitive policies on the eyes of domestic and international public, Belarusian authorities cite as examples the social chaos and economic consequences experienced in European countries (such as France, Italy or Germany), when the people are left unchecked to exercise their ‘rights’: the chaotic and violent protests in France (mainly in Paris) during which a great deal of public and private property is damaged, or the disruption of citizens daily routine in Germany as a result of long-strikes by employees of state companies (especially public transport), etc.

The primacy of the State over that of the Individual

The figure of the State—meaning the central government, state institutions and political leadership—is exceptionally important in East and South-East Asian nations, a point frequently emphasized, both directly and indirectly, in the ‘Bangkok Declaration’.

In these regions, the State is seldom simply a neutral arbiter or a passive administrative body, as is generally the case in many Western European or North American countries — on the contrary, it acts as the chief architect of economic development, as the guarantor of social order and as the defender of the national interest on the international stage.

Thus, the importance of the State to the people who live in it is vital; its needs (commonly known also as statutory obligations) are binding on every citizen, while contributing to its welfare rests on that of each individual.

The Belarusian government largely shares the same statist approach as the governments of East and South-East Asian countries, by continually emphasizing the importance of the Belarusian state and its apparatus (the civil administration, law enforcement agencies, the armed forces, etc.) — which provide the healthy functioning of society — over the particular rights of an individual (or a segment of society), which, if necessary, may even be sacrificed for the good of the state, which in turn means for the general good of society.

Conclusions

As Belarus continues to stubbornly adhere to its policy of self-isolation from the West, it’s also simultaneously engaging with organizations based in the regions of East and South-East Asia — such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) — and forging comprehensive strategic partnerships with the key countries of these regions, such as the People's Republic of China, the Republic of the Union of Myanmar (Burma), the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, etc. 

This politico-economic shift of Minsk towards East Asia, has led to ‘Asian Values’ becoming increasingly part of the daily lives of millions of Belarusian citizens (in the context of their relationship with Belarusian state institutions), as well as of the country's social, religious, moral and cultural realities, which, if it continues at the current pace, will inevitably deepen the divide between Belarus and the West.